Hi,
I have obtained two Kiron SatTrak IV controllers and I am hoping that
someone hasor can tell me where the St_Utility program might be obtained.
Please contact me off list if you can provide any information on this unit.
Thanks in advance for the assistance.
kn4kl(a)arrl.net
73, de KN4KL ed
EX: KG4KL & W1AW/KG4
https://youtu.be/kEvsKN9ZSyw
Gary KN4AQ's YouTube channel, HamRadioNow:
https://www.youtube.com/user/HamRadioNow
Gary's video of the pass and interview with us is coming in the next few
days. Check back here for the link when it goes live.
Thanks to Tucker, W4FS, for doing the demo, Gary KN4AQ, for collaborating
with me, Dennis, NC4DK, and Ian Hewitt, from Raleigh Amateur Radio Society
for helping me set this up. Thanks also to Clayton, W5PFG for the audio
recording of this pass.
http://www.rars.org/
73, John Brier KG4AKV
Thought I would pass something along to the group, and see if anyone is
interested.
While I have been working on perfecting my dual HT handheld satellite
operation methods, I discovered that I simply don't have enough hand's,
ears, and eye's for everything. With this limitation in mind, I designed a
simple circuit board to interface a headset with a pair of HT's, and an
audio recorder.
The board as designed can interface to a pair of FT-60's via 3.5mm TRRS
cables, or a VX-8 with Yaesu's CT-M11 cable. RX audio is sent to a stereo
headset (in mono, of course) and to one channel of a stereo recorder.
Microphone audio from the headset mic is sent to the TX radio and to the
other channel of the stereo recorder. This way, the recorder should capture
both sides of the QSO without issue. The recorder has 2 pot's for level
adjustment of both the TX and RX audio levels to the recorder. I also
included a trimpot to adjust the bias level of the microphone, should one
wish to lower it for any reason, as well as a header to install a PTT
switch. My plan was to mount a momentary switch on a handle I plan to make
for my arrow antenna.
I will have 2 extra boards available in a few weeks time when they get back
from my board fab house. If anyone is interested, I can drop one of these
extra's in the mail, and I would ask for about $25 for them. I can make
more if there is a large interest from the group.
Enjoy.
Mike, AE0MT.
I happen to be a fan of using Software Defined Radio (SDR) to receive
amateur satellites. It is an inexpensive way to view all the signals
appearing on a satellite's passband simultaneously. While I don't
normally run SDR full time at my station, from time to time I use it
to monitor activity on busy satellite passes because I can view and
record all activity.
As a result of more people using SDR on satellites, I have discovered
an operating trait that warrants some discussion and evaluation.
On more than one occasion, I have given a call to a very specific
station, and instead of my intended target had another SDR-based
station appear on frequency immediately saying "QRZ? QRZ?" rather than
wait and listen to who is calling on the frequency. The SDR user saw a
signal on their waterfall and clicked on it. They "pounced" on what
they perceived to be another station looking to make contact which
might not necessarily be the case.
I've see the same thing happen a few times with pileups. There is an
existing pileup in progress when the SDR station comes into the
footprint. Rather than wait a short period to listen, they click on
the new signal in their waterfall, and immediately proceed to "QRZ" on
the frequency of the pileup, sometimes interrupting the flow of
existing contacts.
Just today I heard this scenario: Station 1 calls CQ. Station 2 went
to answer. The SDR user clicked on the waterfall, heard only part of
the callsign of Station 2, and proceeded to call Station 2, ignoring
the possibility that Station 2 was attempting to QSO with someone
else.
It seems to me the visual nature of SDR waterfalls is causing a
temporary lapse in judgement when it comes to a basic ham radio
principle that we apply to satellite operating -- listen with our ears
before transmitting.
SDR is a great listening tool. With great power comes great responsibility.
73
Clayton
W5PFG
Hello all,
Is it not hard times for new and prospective satellite operators (like
me) in terms of equipment choices, at least in terms of the "big three"?
(And, to be clear, I'm talking about current, in-production models only.)
I'm looking for an HF base/mobile radio, and also a VHF/UHF-only
all-mode base/mobile radio that I can use for the linear satellites but
- wait - there are no VHF/UHF-only all mode radios! That means I need to
buy a "shack in a box" but - wait - there are only two choices (at what
I will call moderate prices), the ancient TS-2000 and equally ancient
FT-857D. There is the new and somewhat more expensive FT-991A and,
although that sounds like a very good radio, for HF at that price point
I might prefer the IC-7300 but that would mean no satellite work.
I'm also looking for a portable HF QRP radio, and a portable radio I can
use for the linear satellites. Again the venerable but ancient FT-817ND
is pretty much the only game in town. As with the HF base radios above,
if I am only interested in HF QRP I would probably rather put my money
toward a KX2 or KX3 of newer design but, again, that would mean no
satellite work.
So as a new operator, to get into linear satellites it seems I am forced
to either (1) troll the swap meets for ancient gear; (2) buy new gear of
old design (which in my mind is even worse); or (3) buy new gear of
modern design that works for satellite and HF, but is not necessarily
the radio I would choose for HF alone.
I should add that the situation is not much better for HT/mobile radios
for the FM satellites, but at least there are some cost effective
workarounds including the less expensive Baofeng/Wouxun/Tytera radios
and their clones.
Thanks for indulging my shopping frustrations, and my inexperience, but
I have to think there are others new to the hobby that are having
similar thoughts. Do Amsat members see this as a problem?
Probably off to spend some new money on an old radio...
73 - Ken - VA7KBM
I’ve gotten a number of excellent replies to my question, but since they
were all off-list, I thought I would post a short summary in case anyone
else was interested.
One reply that taught me a lot referenced the situation that has already
been discussed regarding the very large volume of traffic being directed
towards the ISS since it returned to 145.825. As explained in the note, if
a digipeater is flooded with transmissions to the point that many (most?)
cannot be decoded, then naturally it has nothing to re-transmit back over
the air.
That is a very valid explanation for why I might not be HEARD, nor receive
very much on the downlink. And my iGate certainly can’t forward much to the
website if successful digipeats are way down.
While that might explain the situation over the Eastern US, I got a “same
situation here” from Australia. So, I have to continue wondering if it’s
more than just congestion.
Another ham that is seeing closer to normal performance is operating at
higher power than many of us. So, that is another vote in the direction of
a “too busy” receiver on the ISS with only a few contacts getting through.
Time will tell; I just wanted to share those informative off-list comments.
Many thanks to all who replied.
-Scott
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scott wrote:
> Hello everyone.
>
> While the ISS packet digipeater is off for the crew docking today, I
> thought it might be a good time to see what I could learn from the group
> in regard to the rather drastic reduction in performance (both ways - TX &
> RX) that I've seen since the Space Station's digipeater moved back to
> 2-meters.
>
> I noticed this from day-1 and might have even commented on it previously.
> But now that some time has passed and a good number of you reading this
> have had your own experiences with the ISS back on 2-meters, I had to
> bring it up again.
>
> I realize that is a complete apples/oranges situation... different radios
> & antennas on BOTH ends, different band propagation, etc., etc. But here
> is my dilemma...
>
> While I have been enjoying the very positive reports from many of you, I
> have also been in touch with some hams from various locations that, like
> me, can't buy a connection. And unlike myself, these are experienced
> operators who regularly could connect to the ISS on 70cm across perhaps
> half the width of the U.S. Also, to the best of my knowledge, these same
> amateurs were very successful on 2-meter packet to the ISS before the
> original radio failed.
>
> So yes, I know this is like asking why two different cars drive
> differently, but as I said my confusion is how and why others are seeing
> so much success. One more stick on the fire is that my iGate is also
> basically deaf now, even though I have put it on an appropriate 2m antenna
> and of course changed the frequency settings. I was enjoying an
> exceptional number of iGate relays to the website on 70cm, but next to
> zero on 2m.
>
> (Please let me add that my 2-meter packet setup works very well to a local
> digipeater or on terrestrial APRS. Also, my iGate hears extremely well if
> I move it to 144.39)
>
> Getting digipeated is fun, but frankly I would be happy to just HEAR the
> thing again. So, I don’t really think it’s competition on the band & some
> of us not being heard, but rather something more in the RF arena.
>
> As always, observations and suggestions from everyone are appreciated!
>
> -Scott, K4KDR
> Montpelier, VA USA
Hello everyone.
While the ISS packet digipeater is off for the crew docking today, I thought it might be a good time to see what I could learn from the group in regard to the rather drastic reduction in performance (both ways - TX & RX) that I've seen since the Space Station's digipeater moved back to 2-meters.
I noticed this from day-1 and might have even commented on it previously. But now that some time has passed and a good number of you reading this have had your own experiences with the ISS back on 2-meters, I had to bring it up again.
I realize that is a complete apples/oranges situation... different radios & antennas on BOTH ends, different band propagation, etc., etc. But here is my dilemma...
While I have been enjoying the very positive reports from many of you, I have also been in touch with some hams from various locations that, like me, can't buy a connection. And unlike myself, these are experienced operators who regularly could connect to the ISS on 70cm across perhaps half the width of the U.S. Also, to the best of my knowledge, these same amateurs were very successful on 2-meter packet to the ISS before the original radio failed.
So yes, I know this is like asking why two different cars drive differently, but as I said my confusion is how and why others are seeing so much success. One more stick on the fire is that my iGate is also basically deaf now, even though I have put it on an appropriate 2m antenna and of course changed the frequency settings. I was enjoying an exceptional number of iGate relays to the website on 70cm, but next to zero on 2m.
(Please let me add that my 2-meter packet setup works very well to a local digipeater or on terrestrial APRS. Also, my iGate hears extremely well if I move it to 144.39)
Getting digipeated is fun, but frankly I would be happy to just HEAR the thing again. So, I don’t really think it’s competition on the band & some of us not being heard, but rather something more in the RF arena.
As always, observations and suggestions from everyone are appreciated!
-Scott, K4KDR
Montpelier, VA USA
I purchased two Hamvention tickets at $22 each, $44 total, online but
I will not be able to attend.
I will sell both shipped via USPS Priority mail for $34. Payment via
PayPal only.
73
Clayton
W5PFG
